Jump to content

Talk:David Duke

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 68.196.162.105 (talk) at 14:49, 16 August 2022 (→‎Replacing infobox image). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Former good article nomineeDavid Duke was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
September 17, 2006WikiProject peer reviewReviewed
September 26, 2006Featured article candidateNot promoted
Current status: Former good article nominee

Template:BLP noticeboard

Template:Vital article

To add to article

To add to this article: information about why Duke lived in Moscow for five years, and what he did while he was there. 173.88.246.138 (talk) 23:40, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Replacing infobox image

Hello, I found Duke's junior class image from the Riverside Military Academy. Copyright is annoying and has so far prevented us from using many images for this article. I am wondering if we could use that image in place of the low-quality 2020 version we have. Here are the reasons why I want to do so.

1. Duke became an active white supremacist during his teenage years, joined the Klan in the 1970s, became a Grand Wizard in 1974, ran for president in 1980, and ran for state senate twice in the 1970s. This image from 1967 is only a decade away from those activities while the one we are currently using is around fifty years afterwards.

2. This image is higher-quality than the one we are currently using.

3. Many news reports from his time in politics constantly talked about his good looks (even though to me he seems to look like anybody else) such as this: "He is a tall man of 40 with tousled, sandy-colored hair and pale-blue eyes. He has soft, disarming good looks which in recent years have been reshaped by several bouts with a plastic surgeon."[1] Therefore we should show a picture more representative of that image than of a more recent image.

BTW I hope to start working on this article soon. The state of this article is shameful and we need to drastically improve the public knowledge of this evil man.

That is so weird. Duke was never an overly handsome man.

Jon698 (talk) 15:36, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed infobox image
Current infobox image

References

  1. ^ "EVOLUTION OF A BIGOT DAVID DUKE WENT FROM GRAND WIZARD OF THE KU KLUX KLAN TO NEAR-SUCCESSFUL CANDIDATE FOR THE U.S. SENATE. ARE HIS DAYS OF NAZISM AND WHITE SUPREMACY A THING OF THE PAST, OR IS THE HOODED ROBE STILL HANGING IN HIS CLOSET?". Sun-Sentinel. February 10, 1991. Archived from the original on May 10, 2020.

Semi-protected edit request on 30 December 2021

In the early life section of Duke's page, in the third paragraph, second and third line, there is unneeded language ("in 1970" appears twice in the same sentence) and in the case of the first "in 1970," if that one is kept, the "in" should be lowercased since it's part of the section before the comma. Thesleepingjournalist (talk) 19:46, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Done --Hemanthah (talk) 06:02, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Neo-nazi" description

Added the description of "neo-Nazi" to the opening cited to the SPLC profile article, but this was reverted. The 1992 article by Julia Reed in The New York Review of Books only ever describes David Duke as being a Nazi or having such sympathies, which is not quite close enough or too interpretative to use the term "neo-Nazi". Reed's article can support describing Duke as a "white supremacist", I was wrong to assert this in an edit summary a couple of days ago.Philip Cross (talk) 10:18, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Changes need to be made about Election Page

Whomever wrote the David Duke page seriously had some glaring errors in the elections. There's also a subtle bias there painting Duke as more flattering but wrong. For instance, the U.S. Senate (1990) states he's the only Republican and three Democrats. Then it contradicts and says Ben Bagert was nominated. Then it tries to infer Bagert was pushed out by the party. In the Governor 1991, it implies Roemer was squeezed only by Duke and ignores the effect of Clyde Holloway, who was the official endorsed GOP candidate. I think the whole page deserves and auditing and realism given to it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Acpritt (talkcontribs) 08:59, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Current photo?

Can anybody confirm that the photo is really from 2022? Pretty sure he looks nothing like that anymore. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.114.90.151 (talk) 20:14, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]